Advertisement

Cases of Teaching Design and Innovation

Chapter
  • 159 Downloads
Part of the Contemporary Issues in Technology Education book series (CITE)

Abstract

This chapter describes two practice-based cases of teaching design and innovation. The aim of the undergraduate case studies was to instil design and innovation competences in students of both engineering and business disciplines. The cases involved student teams working with multi-national subsidiaries and incubation centre start-ups. The cases will demonstrate how the concept of phronesis, presented in Chap. 2; the concept of responsibility, presented in Chap. 3; and the concept of reflection, presented in Chap. 5, have been applied in a real-life educational context. The learning from the cases will be used to develop a generic process called simulation-action learning (SAL) which will be outlined in Chap. 7. In addition, an objective of this book is also to contribute to practitioner education in the area of design and innovation. Consequently, a third industry-based case study provides an example of research-informed teaching that influenced the development of SAL.

Keywords

Educational case study Teaching design and innovation Student teams Student cross-disciplinary teams Research-informed teaching 

References

  1. Ågerfalk, P. J. (2010). Editorial: Getting pragmatic. European Journal of Information Systems, 19, 251–256.  https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2010.1022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benbasat, I., & Zmud, R. W. (1999). Empirical research in information systems: The practice of relevance. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boud, D., & Feletti, G. (1998). Changing problem-based learning. Introduction to the second edition. In D. Boud & G. I. Feletti (Eds.), The challenge of problem-based learning (pp. 1–14). London: Kogan.Google Scholar
  4. Chang, K.-E., Chen, Y.-L., Lin, H.-Y., & Sung, Y.-T. (2008). Effects of learning support in simulation-based physics learning. Computers & Education, 51, 1486–1498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cooper, R. G. (2001). Winning at new products: Accelerating the process from idea to launch. New York: Perseus Publishing.Google Scholar
  6. Costello, G. J. (2014). Teaching product design through industry collaboration. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the ASME 2014 12th Biennial Conference on Engineering Systems Design and Analysis ESDA2014 Volume 1, June 25–27, 2014, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
  7. Costello, G. J. (2016). Incubation centres and the teaching of innovation: Bridging theory and practice. Journal of the All-Ireland Society for Higher Education AISHE-J, 8(1). Available on-line through http://ojs.aishe.org/index.php/aishe-j/article/view/242
  8. Costello, G. J., Donnellan, B., & Conboy, K. (2013). Implementing an innovation project in an Irish multi-national subsidiary: A dialogical action research study. Irish Journal of Management, 33(1), 73–89.Google Scholar
  9. Curedale, R. (2013). Design thinking: Process and methods manual. Design Community College. Topanga, California.Google Scholar
  10. Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dym, C. L., Agogino, A. M., Eris, O., Frey, D. D., & Leifer, L. J. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Engineers Ireland. (2019). Engineers Ireland website. http://www.engineersireland.ie. Accessed July 2019.
  13. Enterprise Ireland. (2018). Enterprise Ireland website. http://www.enterprise-ireland.com/en/. Accessed April 2018.
  14. Eppinger, S. D. (2001). Innovation at the speed of information. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 149–158.Google Scholar
  15. Fitzgerald, B., Russo, N., & Stolterman, E. (2002). Information systems development: Methods in action. Berkshire, UK: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  16. Gattie, D. K., Kellam, N. N., Schramski, J. R., & Walther, J. (2011). Engineering education as a complex system. European Journal of Engineering Education, 36(6), 521–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gavin, K. (2011). Case study of a project-based learning course in civil engineering design. European Journal of Engineering Education, 36(6), 547–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gillham, B. (2000). Case study research methods. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  19. Hevner, A., & Chatterjee, S. (2010). Design research in information systems: Theory and practice (integrated series in information systems). New York/London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. iHub. (2019). GMIT innovation hubs. https://www.gmit.ie/gmit-innovation-hubs. Accessed July 2019.
  21. Jørgensen, F. (2004). The student voice. In A. Kolmos, F. K. Fink, & L. Krogh (Eds.), The Aalborg PBL model: Progress, diversity and challenges (pp. 21–35). Aalborg, Denmark: Aalborg University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Kelly, S., & Murnane, S. (2005). Academic performance evaluation and the organisation of knowledge in the research-intensive university. In N. Harvey (Ed.), The Irish Journal of Management incorporating IBAR: Selected papers from the 2005 Irish Academy of Management Conference (Vol. 27, pp. 95–109). Dublin, Ireland: Blackhall Publishing.Google Scholar
  23. Lee, A. (1989). A Scientific Methodology for MIS Case Studies. MIS Quarterly March 1989, 33–50.Google Scholar
  24. Leavy, B. (1994). The craft of case-based qualitative research. IBAR - Irish Business and Administrative Research, 15, 105–118.Google Scholar
  25. Leonard, D. A., & Rayport, J. (1997). Spark innovation through empathic design. Harvard Business Review, 75(6 November–December), 102–113.Google Scholar
  26. Lester, R. K., & Piore, M. J. (2004). Innovation-the missing dimension. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  27. MacMahon, C., Coleman, M., Ledwith, C., Cliffe, B., & McGlone, R. (2010). Accelerating Campus Entrepreneurship (ACE): A Sectional Analysis of Practices to Embed Entrepreneurship Education into Engineering at Irish Higher Education Institutions. Paper presented at the ISEE 3rd International Symposium for Engineering Education 1-2 July 2010.Google Scholar
  28. Mårtensson, P., & Lee, A. S. (2004). Dialogical action research at omega corporation. MIS Quarterly, 28(3), 507–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mason, C., & Arshed, N. (2013). Teaching entrepreneurship to university students through experiential learning. Industry and Higher Education, 27(6), 449–463.Google Scholar
  30. Mintzberg, H. (1979). An emerging strategy of “direct” research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 582–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nadler, D. N., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). Beyond the charismatic leader: Leadership and organizational change. In R. Katz (Ed.), The human side of managing technological innovation: A collection of readings (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Savin-Baden, M. (2003). Facilitating problem-based learning: Illuminating perspectives. Maidenhead, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Schön, D. A. (1990). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  34. Student Awards. (2018). Student entrepreneur awards. Available on-line at http://studententrepreneurawards.com/. Accessed April 2018.
  35. Susman, G. I., & Evered, R. D. (1978). An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(4), 582–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thermo King. (2019). Thermo King website. https://www.thermoking.com/na/en.html. Accessed July 2019.
  37. Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K. (2005). Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market and organizational change. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  38. Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly, C. (2004). The ambidextrous organization: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. In M. L. Tushman & P. Anderson (Eds.), Managing strategic innovation and change: A collection of readings (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Ulrich, K. T., & Eppinger, S. D. (2004). Product design and development (3rd ed.). Boston/London: Irwin McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  40. Van de Ven A. H. (2010). Reflections on engaged scholarship (paper delivered to Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota).Google Scholar
  41. Verrijin-Stuart, A. (1989). Some reflections on the Namur conference on information system concepts. In E. Falkenberg & P. Lindgreen (Eds.), Information systems concepts: An in-depth analysis. North Holland: IFIP.Google Scholar
  42. Whitten, J. L., Bentley, L. D., & Ho, T. I. M. (1986). Systems analysis & design methods (2nd ed.). Santa Clara, CA: Times Mirror/Mosby College.Google Scholar
  43. Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (2003). Lean thinking: Banish waste and create wealth in your corporation. London: Free Press.Google Scholar
  44. Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (2005). Lean solutions. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  45. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Galway-Mayo Institute of TechnologyGalwayIreland

Personalised recommendations